Comment by Ygg2

> Except I never called it "a GC language" (whatever that means). I said, and I quote, "Rust does have a GC".

Ok, semantics aside, my point still stands. C also has a GC. See Boehm GC. And before you complain RC is part of std I will point that std is optional and is on track to become a freestanding library.

> Can you accept that your prerequisites and compromises might not be universal

Not the way hardware is moving, which is to say more emphasis on more cores and with no more free lunch from hardware. Regardless of whether it is on-prem or in the cloud, mandatory GC is not a cost you can justify easily anymore.

> As a side note, I'll add that a tracing GC doesn't necessarily have a negative impact on speed, and may even have a positive one

Yeah, but it has a negative impact on memory. As witnessed in the latest RAM crisis, there is no guarantee you can just rely on more memory providing benefits.

> After all, I don't care if my user's credit-card data is stolen due to a UAF or due to SQL injection.

Sure, but those that see fewer UAF errors have more time to deal with logic errors. Of course there are confounding variables such as believing you are king of the world, or that Rust defends you from common mistakes, but overall for similar codebases you see fewer bugs.